What I find particularly distasteful is your continued speculation that things happened very differently on the murder night from the way the surviving victim described them.

This sentiment could apply equally to another possible victim, one who did not survive. His name was James Hanratty, and you would not have to search far on this site to find his every action and utterance called into question and his general character demeaned. Yet for many who have read up on the case there exists the possibility, no matter how remote, that a miscarriage of justice took place.

We are all attempting to shine some light on this perplexing case, from whichever angle we come, and that will on occasion cause discomfort. However I believe we have a duty to search for a fuller truth in this case, and oppose any voices which wish to limit our debate. If that means questioning the account of Valerie Storie then so be it.

At the same time we also have a duty to remember that amongst all the legalities and forensics and armchair psychology there were human lives at issue in the A6 case, and that this is not a game of Cluedo. I thought that Limehouse’s recent post, where she related a personal memory of grief to the situation of Valerie Storie, was a very powerful piece of writing and a reminder of that duty.

I follow your reasoning but it was of course still pretty daft or incompetent of Hanratty to then go and leave the gun on his own usual doorstep. That naturally enough still attracted more attention to him than if he had dumped it miles away from both Liverpool and London. I am sure you agree.

I would add that I strongly share your concern about the tone and comments in moste's recent posts.

What I find particularly distasteful is your continued speculation that things happened very differently on the murder night from the way the surviving victim described them.

This sentiment could apply equally to another possible victim, one who did not survive. His name was James Hanratty, and you would not have to search far on this site to find his every action and utterance called into question and his general character demeaned. Yet for many who have read up on the case there exists the possibility, no matter how remote, that a miscarriage of justice took place.

We are all attempting to shine some light on this perplexing case, from whichever angle we come, and that will on occasion cause discomfort. However I believe we have a duty to search for a fuller truth in this case, and oppose any voices which wish to limit our debate. If that means questioning the account of Valerie Storie then so be it.

At the same time we also have a duty to remember that amongst all the legalities and forensics and armchair psychology there were human lives at issue in the A6 case, and that this is not a game of Cluedo. I thought that Limehouse’s recent post, where she related a personal memory of grief to the situation of Valerie Storie, was a very powerful piece of writing and a reminder of that duty.

You put it as it is, thanks for that.
I knew I had read Ms. Storie mention somewhere about the Chilterns. I found it in the second installment in the newspaper that SH uploaded. She states:
"I remember we were doing our best, over a few drinks, to work out a system of penalty marks, for the ambitious all day rally, we were trying to organise through the Chiltern Hills". I found this quite interesting as the Chilterns begin a few miles north of Slough, running in a north westerly direction, petering out around Barton-le -clay,about 4 or 5 miles shy of Clophill.
I mean call me suspicious, but of the multitude of 80 mile round trips they could have come up with, they planned for this one.

You put it as it is, thanks for that.
I knew I had read Ms. Storie mention somewhere about the Chilterns. I found it in the second installment in the newspaper that SH uploaded. She states:
"I remember we were doing our best, over a few drinks, to work out a system of penalty marks, for the ambitious all day rally, we were trying to organise through the Chiltern Hills". I found this quite interesting as the Chilterns begin a few miles north of Slough, running in a north westerly direction, petering out around Barton-le -clay,about 4 or 5 miles shy of Clophill.
I mean call me suspicious, but of the multitude of 80 mile round trips they could have come up with, they planned for this one.

Moste,

You still haven't explained who drove the Morris Minor from the scene of Gregsten's execution to Avondale Crescent. You have suggested that Valerie Storie was lying (she could hardly be mistaken) in saying that the murderer was in the car at the time of the shooting, and have stated that the murderer was never in the car.

So I ask again, if the murderer was never in the car, who drove it away from Deadman's Hill on the morning of 23 August 1961, if not the murderer?

We are all attempting to shine some light on this perplexing case, from whichever angle we come, and that will on occasion cause discomfort. However I believe we have a duty to search for a fuller truth in this case, and oppose any voices which wish to limit our debate. If that means questioning the account of Valerie Storie then so be it.

Cobalt

I am attempting to resolve a point raised by moste.

He says that Valerie's account is wrong in that the murderer was never in the Morris Minor. Yet we know that the car was eventually found in Avondale Crescent on the evening of 23 August 1961. How did it get there? Most people believe that the murderer drove it there, moste, by implication says that this cannot be so, as the murderer was never in the car.

If the murderer drove the car on the morning (of even the afternoon) of 23 August, then he must have been in that car to do so.

I have no objection to people raising questions as to the veracity of Valerie Storie, but to ask those questions and raise those issues and then run away from any debate, in my opinion, is not on.

I follow your reasoning but it was of course still pretty daft or incompetent of Hanratty to then go and leave the gun on his own usual doorstep. That naturally enough still attracted more attention to him than if he had dumped it miles away from both Liverpool and London. I am sure you agree.

I would add that I strongly share your concern about the tone and comments in moste's recent posts.

Best regards,
OneRound

Hi OneRound,

Oh yes, Hanratty was nothing if not incompetent. He may have taken Dixie France into his confidence, and Dixie may have advised him to dispose of the gun immediately and then put as much distance between it and himself as possible. "Where shall I put it?" "Oh I'm sure you'll think of somewhere, Jim."

Love,

Caz
X

__________________"Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov

We are all attempting to shine some light on this perplexing case, from whichever angle we come, and that will on occasion cause discomfort. However I believe we have a duty to search for a fuller truth in this case, and oppose any voices which wish to limit our debate. If that means questioning the account of Valerie Storie then so be it.

Hi cobalt,

I would certainly not wish to 'limit' the debate. Similarly I hope you would respect my right to express an opinion on its nature when adding to it myself. If moste wants to question Valerie's account that's entirely his choice, and we can all learn something from the choices made by our fellow posters.

Quote:

At the same time we also have a duty to remember that amongst all the legalities and forensics and armchair psychology there were human lives at issue in the A6 case, and that this is not a game of Cluedo. I thought that Limehouse’s recent post, where she related a personal memory of grief to the situation of Valerie Storie, was a very powerful piece of writing and a reminder of that duty.

It most certainly is not a game of Cluedo. So perhaps we can get back to what moste was suggesting, and how it could possibly work with the known facts. Let's not limit that debate. I'm up for it if you are.

Love,

Caz
X

__________________"Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov

'I was on my own. I came back about 10 o'clock. I went back to the flat, picked up my luggage and took a large sum of cash with me. I went to the station about 10.15. I again put my case in the left luggage-it was a different man-I gave him a 6d tip.’

Has Bob just transplanted the events of 24th August 1961 of the first alibi story into the second alibi story? What flat is Bob talking about? How can Hanratty have put his luggage in the left luggage office twice without removing it in between times? Where has the large amount of cash appeared from?

More questions than answers.

A couple of other strange bits in Woffinden that I do not think have been mentioned before.

- When describing how Acott and Oxford visited Hanratty's parents on 26th September (page 101) asking about Hanratty's whereabouts, Woffinden says: "James and Mary were, of course, unable to assist in any way, not having heard from him since early July." But they must have received the postcards from Ireland; Woffinden says Anderson received hers on 11th September.

- Woffinden asks (page 149) about Storie's evidence at the committal: "Why, at a public hearing, was this crucial part of evidence suddenly held in camera?"He does not realise this was done at the special request of Sherrard.

[Sherrard: “It is clear that some portions of her evidence may well be the subject matter of legal argument as to its admissibility in due course. Such arguments could prejudice the events if it was published before the trial. On these grounds my application is that her evidence ought to be taken in camera.” The application was granted.]

Remembering James Hanratty today on the 54th anniversary of his state murder by this inglorious, deep-rooted and corrupt political/legal establishment that's been in force in these islands since the year dot. An establishment that truth and justice is a complete stranger to.

Remembering too Martin Luther King on the 48th anniversary of his murder by the nefarious US political elite. R.I.P Martin.

__________________
*************************************"A body of men, HOLDING THEMSELVES ACCOUNTABLE TO NOBODY, ought not to be trusted by anybody." --Thomas Paine ["Rights of Man"]

"Justice is an ideal which transcends the expedience of the State, or the sensitivities of Government officials, or private individuals. IT HAS TO BE PURSUED WHATEVER THE COST IN PEACE OF MIND TO THOSE CONCERNED." --'Justice of the Peace' [July 12th 1975]